News Can Socialism Provide a Stable Political Framework?

[Townsend]

I didn't know that Cuba had one of the best health care systems in the world.

I knew it was a lot better than the U.S.'s. But that's not saying much.

got proof?

 

[Smurf]

Oh... wikipedia. Right.

 

[Townsend]

Oh... wikipedia. Right.

You're starting to worry me Smurf...

 

[Smurf]

Townsend? Did you read that entire article? You picked the very last paragraph in an article that says things like this:

"More than 50 hospitals are currently being renovated, expanded and equipped to offer excellent services to both national and foreign patients. The program began in 2004 with an estimated cost of 835 million USD, which includes the latest equipment valued at approximately 400 million USD." (ibid)

Of over 130,000 healthcare professionals with a university education, 25,845 today serve in international missions in 66 different countries. They offer medical services to 85,154,748 people; 34,700,000 in Latin America and the Caribbean and 50,400,000 in Africa and Asia. Of these, 17,651 are doctors, 3,069 are dentists and 3,117 are healthcare technicians who work in optic services and other areas. [4]

Castro has long made the promise of free, universal health care an important part of the case for his government. The Cuban government maintains a hospital system for health tourists, widely recognized and well regarded, and also sends medicine, doctors and teachers all over third world. Today, Cuba has over 20,000 health workers in Venezuela, 600 in Honduras, 200 doctors in South Africa, and many more spread around the world.

By "Native-Cubans" I think they meant indigenous. It's curious that the CIA factbook doesn't even give a figure for the number of indigenous in Cuba (quite possibly they were all killed off - but then why did wikipedia say that)
This requires further investigation.

 

[Smurf]

Right. That's complete bull****. I'm editing it now. This all started on september 15th from a nationalist pig who even bragged about it on his blog http://www.babalublog.com/archives/002239.html . What a dumbass.

The great thing about wikipedia is you can check the history of any article really really far back.

Looking back I see "Universalspectator" has been making continuous changes of this bull**** nature ever since sept 15th while some more level-headed members continuously revert his changes. Several of his accounts are now deleted (and probably IPs banned), possibly by the wiki administration. You can check yourself.

Cuba's healthcare is still one of the best in the world and some mini-McCarthyist's attempting to edit a wiki article won't change that. Any number of sites here will tell you the same thing.

 

[Pengwuino]

By "Native-Cubans" I think they meant indigenous. It's curious that the CIA factbook doesn't even give a figure for the number of indigenous in Cuba (quite possibly they were all killed off - but then why did wikipedia say that)
This requires further investigation.

CIA world factbook, as I was told on this forum, is a compliation of independant sources. Don't blame them.

 

[Smurf]

CIA world factbook, as I was told on this forum, is a compliation of independant sources. Don't blame them.

No I googled it. Indigenous cubans were wiped out by the start of the 18th century just like most of the islands.

 

[Pengwuino]

I just said don't blame them for not having the info. Don't get all defensive

 

[Smurf]

nah nah nah nah Townsend. Your precious Wiki article is gone (edited by none other than yours truely).

 

[loseyourname]

RIIIIGHT Mary Kay. Thank you
http://www.marykay.com/home.aspx

These guys. okay Townsend. That's who I was talking to. These guys make previously calm mild-mannered house wives into fanatical sales persons all the bloody time (come on - didn't you see that "American Dad" episode?)

Now, I'm not suggesting we brain wash them like they do (because they have help from the entire capitalist system). But it just goes to show that people work for things other than salaries.

What on Earth are you talking about? They work hard because the harder they work, the more money they get. You're right that they don't earn salaries; they earn commission, which gives them even more incentive to work their butts off.

 

[Townsend]

nah nah nah nah Townsend. Your precious Wiki article is gone (edited by none other than yours truely).

Oh well... I guess you're right then Smurf. People would all be happier and healthier if they were forced to give away their money so someone else who didn't earn it can benefit from it. And I'm totally sure that you're correct to assume everyone would show up bright and early and be happy to shovel crap for the rest of their days with no hope of ever doing a job they could actually be happy with.

Sorry for ever thinking that liberty is more important than creating social equality. And sorry of believing that social equality is impossible no matter what kind of government system is used.

In any case...I have better things to waste my time on then this...

 

[Smasherman]

Oh well... I guess you're right then Smurf. People would all be happier and healthier if they were forced to give away their money so someone else who didn't earn it can benefit from it. And I'm totally sure that you're correct to assume everyone would show up bright and early and be happy to shovel crap for the rest of their days with no hope of ever doing a job they could actually be happy with.

Sorry for ever thinking that liberty is more important than creating social equality. And sorry of believing that social equality is impossible no matter what kind of government system is used.

In any case...I have better things to waste my time on then this...

I haven't been online in over a week due to lack of internet, so I haven't responded in a while. (In case you were wondering).

Townsend, do you consider someone who works eight hours a day as a CEO to have worked harder than someone who works eight hours a day as a factory worker?

 

[Pengwuino]

Townsend, do you consider someone who works eight hours a day as a CEO to have worked harder than someone who works eight hours a day as a factory worker?

Over the course of their life... probably!

What is a CEO vs. a factory worker. Factory worker = possibly no education, no expectations, can start out anytime. CEO = almost has to be educated, huge expectations, has to climb an incredibly difficult ladder, sometimes has to fly all around the country/world, and has their work effect the entire company. Their laziness can be magnified an incredible amount and end up making them lose their job. A factory worker can be pretty lazy without being noticed many times...

Plus what kind of CEO works 8 hours a day? My cousin is a CEO and ... he DOESN'T work for about 8 hours a day for about the last 3 years (I mean he works 16 hours a day if that didn't read like i wanted it to read).

And since my name isn't Townsend... i feel equally as obligated to have answred your question!

 

[vanesch]

Townsend, do you consider someone who works eight hours a day as a CEO to have worked harder than someone who works eight hours a day as a factory worker?

The question is not there, I think. It doesn't matter "who works harder" or "who suffers most". You could flaggelate yourself for eight hours, and say that you've been far more miserable (and somehow implicitly assume that this means that you should get at least the same compensation) as someone who enjoys his job and cannot really tell the difference between his spare time and his job. What matters is the value that is created. The guy flaggelating himself didn't create zilch of value (ok, except if he did it in front of a camera ), while the person enjoying himself might very well have done something way more valuable. As such, a (good) CEO would normally take decisions in his 8 hours which create far more value than the factory worker. (now, I will of course be the first to say that I think that corporate CEOs are often a bunch of vastly overpaid idiots whose salary is not in relation to the value they really create but that's one of the many problems of corporatism).

The point is that "one hour of your time" has not the same value, it depends on how much value you create during that hour.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

I would have to agree with the Penguin and Vanesch. The value of the job done by the worker and the rarity of skill, talent, what have you, make that worker worth more. And I would have to agree with Vanesch that very many CEOs and CEO type workers probably very well make much more money than there job really is worth. There are probably also some individuals placed at high positions making large sums of money that hardly work at all as favors or some such thing but again this isn't necessarily the product of capitalism so much as corporatism, or oligopolies as selfAjoint might say. These things can likely be avoided and I'd have to look but I think there probably are capitalist countries where it is avoided.

 

[alexandra]

Sorry for ever thinking that liberty is more important than creating social equality. And sorry of believing that social equality is impossible no matter what kind of government system is used.

In any case...I have better things to waste my time on then this...

I know you are no longer interested in this debate, Townsend - but maybe others are. The thing is - 'liberty' and 'social equality' need not be diametrically opposed to one another. It is possible, I think, to have both. At the moment, there are already constraints on individual 'liberties' in 'democratic' countries, aren't there? And everyone agrees that there should be some constraints on individual liberties if they threaten the liberties of others. It would be no different in a socialist society. In capitalist societies, if you decide not to work you starve. Why should this not be an acceptable norm in a socialist society as well? The only difference is that in a socialist society, no-one would be able to make money off the back of others' work, that's all: liberty (to survive or starve) and social equality (nobody can profit from the labour of others). What's the problem

 

[JungleWorld]

Why was my post deleted? Because I didn't conform to some kind of standard? Or my content was considered irrelevant or inflammatory? Anyway, my main point was

Huge wealth gap tends to destabilize our society. I believe America is still considered a stable one(It is, right?), to a certain extent, because socialist programs such as welfare programs were introduced to diminish direct conflict between the rich and the poor. They acted as buffer.

Redistribution of wealth is not really a character of capitalist society, if I understand capitalism correctly.

And the scholarhip that has been mentioned, IMO, in one kind of buffer, and it creates an impression that we always have the resources to promote ourselves in a capitalist society.

I don't really agree with communism, but I somehow believe in what I said above.

 

[Evo]

Why was my post deleted? Because I didn't conform to some kind of standard? Or my content was considered irrelevant or inflammatory?

No, it was deleted at your request.

Edit: the topic seems changed here. Hehehe
Just disregard this post

You're digging up dead threads.